A plan for Jacob

E

Everyman

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

Just imagine the view a new poster gets of the group: he asks a
question, receives several answers of varying degrees of helpfulness,
and then somewhere along the line Jacob interjects an asinine comment
and the thread degenerates into a sprawling and acrimonious war of
words: people pointing out (for the nth time) why Jacob is wrong, while
he steadfastly refuses to admit any error in anything he says and at the
same time turns up the emotional heat with acerbic personal attacks on
the regulars here.

Look down a list of recent topics: thread after thread has been hijacked
by Jacob to promote one of his eccentric pet ideas about how C should be
"improved" by removing the essential traits that make it C; or
propaganda for his compiler; or a refusal to distinguish between C and
extensions in lcc-win32; or just plain unprovoked verbal aggression
against one of his bugbears (chief amongst them Richard Heathfield, even
though he hasn't posted a response to Jacob for months now).

The only roughly comparable situation in my experience was at sci.math a
few years ago, when a delusional crank called James Harris took over
lots of threads with claims to have an elementary proof of Fermat's Last
Theorem. That was resolved amicably: all parties (including Harris)
agreed that posts by and about Harris and his strange ideas would be
tagged JSH in the subject line, so that they could easily be filtered
out.

Unfortunately, while it would be obvious to anyone with a brain the size
of a cherry tomato that Harris's ramblings were nonsensical, in this
group there's a real danger that if no one corrects Navia then
non-experts might absorb even his more egregious errors. The more one
reads Jacob's posts, the more one realizes how little he knows,
understands or cares about the C language, but at first glance he does
manage to project the image of someone speaking with authority,
especially because of his wretched compiler project.

The best solution I can currently think of is this: someone could create
a webpage describing (completely rationally, with no emotive language)
why Jacob's unique view of C is not to be trusted, and explaining how
new readers can killfile him in popular newsreaders. Then an automated
bot could post a followup to each of Jacob's posts with a link to this
URL. This would allow regular posters to safely killfile Jacob: and if
no one is reading his insults then no one will feel compelled to respond
to them: and all in all the signal-noise ratio of the group will jump.

Do other people think this might be a workable solution? Or is there a
better idea?
 
I

Ian Collins

Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
Humbug.

Do other people think this might be a workable solution? Or is there a
better idea?
Use your killfile.
 
D

Doug

Everyman wrote:

<snip>

It's very unfortunate what's happened to clc over the last few months,
going back a couple of years now.

I'm afraid I don't see it as the 'Jacob situation', though. It takes
two to tango, and from where I'm standing the insults heading toward
Jacob are far worse than those heading away.

I agree that Jacob makes mistakes, and I agree that he gets
defensive. But I've seen very little that would justify the behaviour
toward him I see in this group. Although his defensiveness is
something *he* should work on, I think the way criticisms are
delivered here leaves a lot to be desired - and seem at times
deliberately designed to provoke him.

So I would say 'no' - writing such a page would say more about you
than Jacob. If you did write such a page, I'd probably read it during
a compile, but only for amusement value - which is the same reason I'm
here, there's little real technical discussion in this group these
days.

Doug
 
B

borophyll

Do other people think this might be a workable solution?

No, it is unnecessary at best. I believe in forming an opinion on a
person, like in real life, based on my experiences with that person,
and not through second-hand gossip and opinions from people who may
have an agenda. You need to trust that most people are capable of
forming their own opinions of others. And if they don't like them,
the intelligent person will ignore them. If you really want to make
the world a better place, give money to a charity.

Regards,
B.
 
R

Richard

Doug said:
Everyman wrote:

<snip>

It's very unfortunate what's happened to clc over the last few months,
going back a couple of years now.

I'm afraid I don't see it as the 'Jacob situation', though. It takes
two to tango, and from where I'm standing the insults heading toward
Jacob are far worse than those heading away.

I agree that Jacob makes mistakes, and I agree that he gets
defensive. But I've seen very little that would justify the behaviour
toward him I see in this group. Although his defensiveness is
something *he* should work on, I think the way criticisms are
delivered here leaves a lot to be desired - and seem at times
deliberately designed to provoke him.

I would agree. The nasty elitism that exists in this NG is second to
none. And there are 3 or 4 posters directly responsible for that. Keith
Thompson tends to remain level headed and true to the language whereas
there are a few others who constantly resort to petty sniping and
jibes. If all someone can reply is something "Read the f**king FAQ" then
they shouldn't be here in the first place.
So I would say 'no' - writing such a page would say more about you
than Jacob. If you did write such a page, I'd probably read it during
a compile, but only for amusement value - which is the same reason I'm
here, there's little real technical discussion in this group these
days.

Come now, that's not true.
 
P

pete

Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

Just imagine the view a new poster gets of the group: he

.... sees that Jacob has an anonymous stalker.
 
K

Keith Thompson

Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Fight fire with gasoline, eh?
 
E

Eric Sosman

Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.
 
J

John Smith

Everyman wrote:

Do other people think this might be a workable solution? Or is there a
better idea?

LEAVE JACOB ALONE!!

BTW, James S. Harris is still around, still solving hard
problems, and just as entertaining as ever.

JS
 
K

Kenny McCormack

Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?
 
J

J. J. Farrell

Eric Sosman said:
Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]
Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No; it's obvious that he's a troll trying to stir up more off-topic
nonsense and trouble here. My immediate assumption was that he is you,
Kenny.
 
M

Malcolm McLean

Kenny McCormack said:
Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?
I doubt it. Not Heathfield's style.
 
M

Martin Ambuhl

Kenny said:
Everyman said:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]
Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No. There is little to suggest that. Are you sure he's not Kenny McC.
trying once again to stir the pot with his anti-social trolling?
 
C

Charles Richmond

Martin said:
Kenny said:
Everyman wrote:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]
Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No. There is little to suggest that. Are you sure he's not Kenny McC.
trying once again to stir the pot with his anti-social trolling?

What is your C question ???
 
K

Kenny McCormack

J. J. Farrell said:
No; it's obvious that he's a troll trying to stir up more off-topic
nonsense and trouble here. My immediate assumption was that he is you,
Kenny.

That doesn't make any sense. I *like* Jacob's posts. I think they are
intelligent, thoughtful, and worthwhile. Why would I post otherwise?

And, on the other side, who else here besides RH has such a clear-cut
hard-on (in the stalker sense) for Jacob?
 
D

Doug

Come now, that's not true.

Yeah, fair enough. The board seems to be ok at the moment, and i
remember some good recent discussions about type punning and em...

I'd just like clc to lay off the j-baiting. It causes more noise than
it's worth, it doesn't achieve anything. I really think that some
people do it just for a rise. Let's face it, some of us come back
here to see what'll happen next.

Anyways, the regulars here have been through a rough period in the
past and want to keep things strictly on-topic. New posters, and some
other regulars and non-regulars don't know this rule or don't follow
it strictly.

I think some slack should be cut in light of recent events. In the
words of Jack Nicholson, just before he was melted by a Martian, "why
can't we all just get along?"

I do come here primarily for the technical info (although above I
claim there's little here these days) and every now and then there is
something worth reading.

And I should point out that I rarely post technical answers because I
know there are others here who can answer better than I, and they will
get to you. Although I'll take a shot of there's nothing from the
floor after a while. (A secondary consideration is that I don't want
to get involved in an all-too-common flame war.)

Bed,
Doug
 
K

Keith Thompson

J. J. Farrell said:
On Sep 23, 9:36 pm, (e-mail address removed) (Kenny McCormack)
wrote: [SNIP]
No; it's obvious that he's a troll trying to stir up more off-topic
nonsense and trouble here. My immediate assumption was that he is you,
Kenny.

Please don't feed the trolls. Responding to Kenny only encourages
him.
 
J

Jack Klein

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top